With the rapid increase of the number of smart terminal users and the volume of user voice data services, a mobile communication operator needs to continuously expand the deployment scale of its mobile communication network, and correspondingly updates a network thereof according to continuous evolution of radio communication technologies and protocol standards, in order to obtain a better radio coverage performance and to continuously improve the system capacity. In order to protect existing investments, network evolution of operators will usually have a longer transition period, within which multiple radio communication access technologies co-exist in a network of a single operator. For example, China Mobile and China Unicom in the Asia as well as most of mobile communication operators in the Europe sequentially deploy three radio communication access technologies, namely a Global system for Mobile Communication (GSM), a Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS), and Long-Term Evolution (LTE) in a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) communication standard organization, and also widely deploy a Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) system in an IEEE communication standard organization, for service distribution. For another example, the China Mobile also deploys a Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) in a 3GPP2 communication standard organization, LTE (4G) in the 3GPP communication standard organization, and the WLAN system.
Under a scenario where multiple radio communication access technologies co-exist in the network of a single operator, a service migration process of terminals or service transmission between the terminals and the network (the service transmission may also serve as a node of the service migration process of the terminals, that is, the service transmission may be regarded as a starting point or an ending point of service migration) becomes more complicated. There may exist not only the switching in the same system (e.g., switching between different base stations in the LTE, and switching between different base stations in the UTMS), but also the switching/reorientation between different radio communication access technologies (e.g., switching between LTE and 3G) and traffic migration between a 3GPP radio communication access technology and the WLAN (e.g., service distribution from LTE or 3G to the WLAN).
Under the above-mentioned complicated service migration scenario, in a process that a terminal moves from a source side to a target side, radio link and network situations of the target side may be greatly different from those of the source side, which may be caused by the difference between different radio communication access technologies. For example, a 2G/3G network and a 4G network are greatly different in peak rate and sector throughput. The difference may also be caused by network running situations. For example, the source side is light in load, and the target side is heavy in load, or otherwise. The difference will directly cause that the service performance is greatly changed after a user moves to the target side, which results in great change of the user experience. A service migration process in which the user experience goes bad or severely bad should be avoided to the greatest extent. On the contrary, a service migration process capable of making the user experience better should be more triggered, which requires that a triggering node of the service migration process can acquire sufficient statistical change information of service performance or user experience after the user service migration.
The service migration process of a terminal mainly has two control modes, namely a terminal control mode and a network control mode. In the terminal control mode, the terminal is a core node for searching and processing information and triggering and ending the service migration process. Therefore, information statistics can be easily made, and the service migration process can be autonomously optimized at the terminal.
In the network control mode of the service migration process, the source side is usually a triggering node of the service migration process, and the target side is an ending node of the service migration process. However, a direct interface may not exist between the source side and the target side or an interface having a limited information transfer capability exists between the source side and the target side, so the source side is unlikely to acquire service performance or user experience related information after the user service migration. As a result, the service migration process (including optimization of service migration control parameters or a service migration control algorithm) cannot be optimized in time, and an identical set of inappropriate service migration control parameters or service migration control policy is used within a long time, thereby making the user experience continuously deteriorated.
There have been some solutions at present to allow the target side to transfer parameters to the source side in the service migration process of a terminal. But these parameters are usually state parameters of the target side such as load information of the target side, a radio resource situation, a return link bandwidth, routing information and the like. However, these parameters cannot directly reflect actual service performance or service experience in the user service migration process, and usually can only be used for estimating or predicting the user service satisfaction of the target side.
An effective solution is not proposed yet for the above-mentioned problem in the related art.